Hospital ward incidents through the eyes of nurses – A thick description on the appeal and deadlock of incident reporting systems

IF 4.7 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Safety Science Pub Date : 2024-12-12 DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106728
Jaco Tresfon , Roel van Winsen , Anja H Brunsveld-Reinders , Jaap Hamming , Kirsten Langeveld
{"title":"Hospital ward incidents through the eyes of nurses – A thick description on the appeal and deadlock of incident reporting systems","authors":"Jaco Tresfon ,&nbsp;Roel van Winsen ,&nbsp;Anja H Brunsveld-Reinders ,&nbsp;Jaap Hamming ,&nbsp;Kirsten Langeveld","doi":"10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Incident reporting systems (IRSs) are considered a valuable method to improve patient safety in hospitals. Although many barriers to incident reporting have been identified, little attention is paid to the socio-cultural context of hospital care and the use of IRS over time. Based on ethnographic fieldwork on a neurology/neurosurgery ward of a tertiary referral center in the Netherlands, this article presents a thick description on the perception of nurses and physicians toward incidents, their reporting practices and the general utilization of IRS for improving patient safety. Results suggest that nurses demonstrate a form of structural vigilance in achieving safe health outcomes as part of normal work. Consequently, nurses find it difficult to specify what events can be considered a report-worthy event. Analysis of the use of IRS through four perspectives toward culture (integration, differentiation, fragmentation and bounded ambiguity) showed that the IRS took different forms over time, depending on the legitimacy the reported topics received in the social group dynamics between physicians and nurses. For nurses, it remained often unclear if the actions surrounding the IRS and the invented improvements indeed contributed to patient safety. The results indicate that “incidents” as a concept may have little value for the work on hospital wards and illustrate that IRS has no ‘objective’ purpose in its own right, rather is shaped by the social-cultural context its employed in.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21375,"journal":{"name":"Safety Science","volume":"184 ","pages":"Article 106728"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety Science","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753524003187","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Incident reporting systems (IRSs) are considered a valuable method to improve patient safety in hospitals. Although many barriers to incident reporting have been identified, little attention is paid to the socio-cultural context of hospital care and the use of IRS over time. Based on ethnographic fieldwork on a neurology/neurosurgery ward of a tertiary referral center in the Netherlands, this article presents a thick description on the perception of nurses and physicians toward incidents, their reporting practices and the general utilization of IRS for improving patient safety. Results suggest that nurses demonstrate a form of structural vigilance in achieving safe health outcomes as part of normal work. Consequently, nurses find it difficult to specify what events can be considered a report-worthy event. Analysis of the use of IRS through four perspectives toward culture (integration, differentiation, fragmentation and bounded ambiguity) showed that the IRS took different forms over time, depending on the legitimacy the reported topics received in the social group dynamics between physicians and nurses. For nurses, it remained often unclear if the actions surrounding the IRS and the invented improvements indeed contributed to patient safety. The results indicate that “incidents” as a concept may have little value for the work on hospital wards and illustrate that IRS has no ‘objective’ purpose in its own right, rather is shaped by the social-cultural context its employed in.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Safety Science
Safety Science 管理科学-工程:工业
CiteScore
13.00
自引率
9.80%
发文量
335
审稿时长
53 days
期刊介绍: Safety Science is multidisciplinary. Its contributors and its audience range from social scientists to engineers. The journal covers the physics and engineering of safety; its social, policy and organizational aspects; the assessment, management and communication of risks; the effectiveness of control and management techniques for safety; standardization, legislation, inspection, insurance, costing aspects, human behavior and safety and the like. Papers addressing the interfaces between technology, people and organizations are especially welcome.
期刊最新文献
Teaching children to cross safely: A full-immersive virtual reality training method for young pedestrians Improving occupational safety and health motivation through a dialogue-based inspection practice How risk preference affects evacuees’ route choice in buildings: An IVR-based experimental study Behavioral and psychophysiological responses of initial pilots in collaboration with an experienced but risky captain: A flight-simulation study based on the social facilitation Development and empirical examination of the acceptance of a hazard identification and safety training system based on VR technology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1